CVS difference for ai12s/ai12-0369-1.txt

Differences between 1.1 and version 1.2
Log of other versions for file ai12s/ai12-0369-1.txt

--- ai12s/ai12-0369-1.txt	2020/03/06 06:49:30	1.1
+++ ai12s/ai12-0369-1.txt	2020/03/15 07:59:45	1.2
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
-!standard D.7(1.3/5)                                   20-03-06  AI12-0369-1/01
+!standard D.7(1.3/5)                                   20-03-12  AI12-0369-1/02
 !standard D.7(10.12/5)
 !class Amendment 20-03-06
+!status Amendment 1-2012 20-03-11
+!status ARG Approved 14-0-0  20-03-11
 !status work item 20-03-06
 !status received 20-02-24
 !priority Low
@@ -27,7 +29,7 @@
        entry E;
        Flag  : Boolean := False;
-       Count : Natural :;
+       Count : Natural := 0;
     end T;
     protected body T is
@@ -40,9 +42,10 @@
 can be replaced by:
     type Rec is record
-       Flag  : Boolean;
-       ... <other stuff> ...
-    end record;
+       Flag  : Boolean := False;
+       Count : Natural := 0;
+    end record 
+       with Dynamic_Predicate => (Count /= 0) or not Flag;
     protected type T is
        entry E;
@@ -59,7 +62,7 @@
 Unfortunately, the barrier in the above is not allowed by restrictions
 Simple_Barriers or Pure_Barriers. This means this idiom cannot be used with
-the Ravenscar or Yorvik profiles - which are also commonly used by SPARK users.
+the Ravenscar or Jorvik profiles - which are also commonly used by SPARK users.
@@ -93,16 +96,31 @@
 indexed array components). So we just revise the existing wording to use this 
+!corrigendum D.7(2)
+The following @i<restriction_>@fa<identifier>s are language-defined:
+The actual text is in the conflict file.
+!corrigendum D.7(10.8/2)
+@xindent<The Boolean expression in an entry barrier shall be either a static Boolean
+expression or a Boolean component of the enclosing protected object.>
+@xindent<The Boolean expression in each entry barrier is either a static expression
+or a @fa<name> that statically names (see 4.9) a subcomponent of the enclosing 
+protected object.>
-[Not sure. It seems like some new capabilities might be needed,
-but I didn't check - Editor.]
+None needed.
 !ACATS test
-ACATS B- and C-Tests are needed to check that the new capabilities are
+The Pure_Barriers test(s) should cover that case; an existing Simple_Barriers
+test should be update (or if one doesn't exist, a complete test should be 
+constructed). Both a B-Test and a C-Test should exist for each restriction.

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent